Skip to main content
Meta Stack Exchange

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

Required fields*

21
  • 32
    "and this ad testing should be opt-in for registered contributors" It's worth pointing out that the reduced ads privilege already has the baked in feature of being able to turn it off, for anyone who wants to support the site by being served the full ad suite. Commented Jun 20, 2019 at 16:00
  • 7
    @Servy Good point. But as this is an "experiment", I was thinking more along the lines of opting-in to beta testing. Consenting to being experimented on is, IMO, ethically different than OKing being advertised to. Commented Jun 20, 2019 at 16:05
  • 5
    It'd be nice if this applied network-wide, too. I mean, I'm currently a member for 150 stacks, and that number seems to be growing all of the time. It's annoying to have to re-earn the same basic privileges on site after site, and it'd be yet more annoying if doing so were necessary to have some control over ads. Commented Jun 21, 2019 at 0:05
  • 82
    @Julie And they can get that money from the non-contributing visitors that outnumber the users a thousandfold. If I'd known that SE was going to use my content on not-tech stacks to make ad money, I would have reconsidered those contributions. I'm very careful with how and where I decide to provide content. Then to be punished with ads on top of it is like a slap in the face. Commented Jun 21, 2019 at 4:09
  • 6
    I agree with you in principle. In practice, are ads really such a "punishment"? Commented Jun 23, 2019 at 13:05
  • 44
    @LightnessRacesinOrbit more a burden and a pollution for the mind. Cognitive load from ads is a poison. Commented Jun 24, 2019 at 8:57
  • 2
    @WebHead Well I mean SO has added ads to sites before, usually when they become sufficiently successful. And they certainly never said that all non-tech sites would be ad free forever. In the past they've just said it wasn't worth putting ads on them from a business perspective. Commented Jun 24, 2019 at 13:47
  • 61
    Ads, by their nature, are designed to force your attention to them. Especially considering that animated ads are allowed, and probably 0 limitation on how otherwise obnoxious they are. Additionally, they heavily increase the load of the web page you're viewing and the number of trackers and cookies you're exposed to. So, yes, they are a punishment, whether you look at them or not. Commented Jun 24, 2019 at 15:42
  • 2
    I enjoy the ads on SO, there is a suprising amount of ads on topics I had to work on and nowadays hate... so whenever I see one, I chuckle and whisper "not today, [x], not today!" Commented Jun 25, 2019 at 12:02
  • 1
    @LightnessRacesinOrbit They're monetizing us by displaying the ads, period. They don't need to further monetize us by (keep) displaying the ads to contributors (the "us"). Commented Jun 25, 2019 at 15:43
  • 3
    @LightnessRacesinOrbit I think the vast overwhelming majority of ads (well over 99%) are nothing but the lowest kind of filth. ;-{ Commented Jun 25, 2019 at 19:18
  • 1
    @kraftydevil I think you're misunderstanding. I'm not saying "all ads, ever" should not be shown to contributors ("active users", whatever term SE uses internally), I'm saying this experiment's ads shouldn't be shown unless we opt-in. This is not a final-stage implementation, it's a live experiment with features that include off-site tracking of ad networks that have admittedly not yet been fully vetted by the company. The long-term solution is the "reduced ads privilege", when this is no longer an experiment. This test is ethically different than, say, testing a new page layout. Commented Jun 25, 2019 at 19:53
  • 9
    While I agree with the spirit of this answer, in practice, I'd prefer that contributors are not exempt from this trial period. Contributors are more likely to give useful feedback, and so during this important calibration time, I'd rather see more ads and be given more of an opportunity to critique. Though, after the trial period, YES give us our reduced ad privileges. Commented Jun 25, 2019 at 20:15
  • 2
    @WebHead Yeah, I saw that. I understand your point, but I tend to think forcing us users to experience the terribleness that is advertisements here would be better for the site long-term. Animated ads is a good example: Those that really hate animated ads probably wouldn't opt-in, yet their vocal voices are the most valuable in expressing disgust at such advertisements. Besides, those that really don't want to see the ads can (probably) use an ad blocker. How about a compromise: an opt-out button after the first month? Commented Jun 25, 2019 at 21:05
  • 7
    @TTT I'm not sure anything is really going to be changed, anyway. The SE team has been pretty silent after the first 24 hours or so, leading this to feel like another one of their drive-by "we're doing whatever we want" announcements. I just felt it important that SE be made aware of some strong, reasonable objections to the practice and the way this was rolled out. This was pretty much a disclosure that they'd been doing experiments on us for 6 weeks already, and that's the way it is. I expect to be treated that way by the likes of Facebook, but I'm disheartened that SE would do it, too. Commented Jun 26, 2019 at 15:25